State v Bradley Cooper - 3/24/11

[sunshine05]

If my neighbors house burned down to the ground, I probaby wouldn't notice until about 10:00 the next morning. Once I'm *out*, I'm out. Our dogs bark on occasion, but usually hubby or me tells 'em to 'shut up'. One night when they were being especially persistent, I said to hubby, 'you know, we have them to warn us, one of us should really get up and check.......' :floorlaugh:

I always get up and check and I like that she barks to alert us to things. I couldn't imagine just going back to sleep. I would not be able to w/o checking. Sorry, didn't mean to go on a tangent about this. I was just thinking that not one person saw him, yet there are 14 (?) witnesses who saw her that morning (allegedly).

 

[borndem]

johnfear, Brad himself admitted in his deposition it was possible to place a call remotely using a Cisco Enterprise system. If the jurors don't go insane listening to Kurtz trying to cause chaos, they should 'get it'.

Therein, mon ami, lies the problem. He already talks too fast; he certainly has his baffle 'em with bs down pat (part of his job up there) and he cares, I think, about BC -- and he may have just the goo to grease the skids ....bothersome, that one. Like many, I just hope he doesn't confuse the jury (or let the jury get confused) enough to just throw away what might be the strongest agrument of the case.
MOO

 

[ncsu95]

So, he wouldn't have to call the number just to see IF someone called...he would know because his cell would have rung.

Only if he set simring to ring his cellphone. I don't simring my cell phone ever (mainly because they don't pay for it...the people that really need to know it know it).

 

[ncsu95]

Yes, but was this functionality available in july 08?

Yes. Voicemail email has been around for much longer than that.

 

[ncsu95]

And a car similar to his was seen in the neighborhood as I recall.

I believe it was in his driveway (wasn't it the paper guy???)

 

[ncsu95]

Ok so definitely did not see a Cisco (Linksys) SPA3102 and it wasn't entered into evidence, did see an 871W but anyway.

The SPA3102 is an FXO/FXS device that also has ethernet ports. This would be exactly the type of device used to connect asterisk to the the landline. Yes it can act as a VoIP to PSTN gateway but again Cisco IP Phone cannot work in a vacuum it must establish connection with a call manager server ie. Cisco's IP Phone server.

I wonder if any of the Cisco test labs have external access through an SBC. My systems do, so I have my phones connected directly over the public internet without vpn connection. If not, can the spa3102 do vpn as well?

 

[borndem]

And a car similar to his was seen in the neighborhood as I recall.

Puh-leeze tell more -- I have a very faint memory (I could just stop there, AAMOF) of what you said, but I'd like to refresh myself. Do you know where I could review this? It's making me (more) crazy. I would like to see how reliable that info is & why it hasn't been brought up again... if you know, as they say. TIA.

 

[ncsu95]

We have not seen this yet, but for some reason every time the word computer is mentioned the defense gets really nervous. I have a suspicion that we are going to see something there shortly.

I do have some concerns because it is possible that the tracks were covered pretty well and/or the logs were not obtained in time. I don't know how long TWC keeps that stuff. It is telling to me that Kurtz has already tried to impeach the FBI and accused them of improperly handling the computer (e-machine) when they have not testified to anything at all about it yet.

I think all of the computer testimony is going to be about him accessing her emails. I doubt he did a google search to dump a body, or on how to kill someone by strangulation. Or, there was evidence of additional affairs (or something along those lines).

 

[ncsu95]

I agree that there would be trails on and off. That's what is making me think they spent all of this time dealing with. Barring the internet analysis, it's the only scenario that makes me go: BAM! Guilty dude. However, if this is not the scenario and what we have for evidence now stands and doesn't get more direct, I will go back to my fence post and sit there while the Kurtz-show continues.

I know what you mean. The phone has to be the gotcha moment if there is going to be one. It's amazing how many techies there are posting in this forum. I wonder if we're following it closer because of it (the techie aspect of the potential coverup). I know it interests and fascinates me at the same time.

 

[ncsu95]

(I promise I won't take this O/T by talking about Duke....OUCH!)

We know they had the Cisco VoIP in their home. That's been in testimony. Nancy hated it so Brad put in the VTech but that doesn't mean the VoIP wasn't still in place. Right? Does the Cisco system work in conjunction with TWC?

No it doesn't.

 

[borndem]

We are not talking about some rube who just has the end device. This dude is working with this stuff all the time, and has access to a lot of equipment.

As far as super-secret access goes, I worked on a computer in Australia for 7 hours performing remote control operations from a WiFi in a hotel room in Kentucky. For all intents I was standing in front of the computer to drive the mouse and keyboard, remote access is a fact.

Abso-darn-lutely! I have done testing when we were not told whether we were "remote-ing" or really "there" to see if it could be done by several different locations with various security levels at the same time. We did. We could never tell which venue we each used. The tests worked....

The techs developed a method of using one user login (each user using his own standard personal login/password) and security access to appear seamless for a large group of users (eventually around 6,000 were to be given access, 24/7, so that one login/p would obtain access to all desired networks at many access levels (read, write, delete, run apps). They had to integrate RAC-F, VPN, etc, etc, along with many M/F and PC level apps and it was being installed when I early-retired. 2 1/2 years ago. Some requests for service & other functions, required encryptions, file-shipping/receiving, etc., had to be shipped here & there, and across the US. We were using all kinds of telephone systems as well. Huge, mind-boggling (to me), but successful.

 

[BrownRice]

Ok, I am not a techie but I have a general understanding of these scenarios presented (on a very elementary level - forwarding calls from his work CISCO phone to cell phone to look like the call came from home. Got it.).

1. To do all of this, how long would this take? Does BC just call his CISCO line and punch in some codes and it's done (i.e. 5 minutes) or does it take programming or something and could be an hour?

2. With any of the scenarios you all are discussing, if he did this, would there be some type of physical evidence (i.e. print outs of telephone records showing at 6:40 a.m. telephone A was accessed by BC, or someone with his access to the system, at 6:41 A forwarded a call to telephone B, and telephone C received the call)?

Sorry for the lack of technical verbiage, but if I can get it broken down like a first grader, I'm better off.

 

[BrownRice]

I read here long ago about it. I remember it said that at work in Canada, Brad liked "showing off" Nancy at work. You know, she looked so much more fresh and young back then. I think her life style aged her. Especially: alcohol, stress, sun.

It could just be the harried life of a mom with little kids. There are pictures of her (no date) when her hair was highlighted and she had make up on and looked gorgeous. But that's not how typical stay at home moms look on a daily basis. For me, make up is certainly not a daily occurrence, unless I'm doing something special. Of course, sadness and stress also play into as well. But I thought the pictures of her with her kids she always looked full of love and happy.

 

[Cheyenne130]

They might have but he had an excuse. He had to go to the store for milk. The original time that he gave for leaving for the store was before 6 a.m. and I don't think Harris Teeter opened until 6 a.m.

I have to quote my own post to correct an error. I believe the HT is open 24 hours. I don't know for sure because I'm not local.

 

[carolinalady]

I have to quote my own post to correct an error. I believe the HT is open 24 hours. I don't know for sure because I'm not local.

Yes, it's a 24 hour one. As far as I know, the non-24 hr ones don't open until 7AM.

 

[Cheyenne130]

Yes, it's a 24 hour one. As far as I know, the non-24 hr ones don't open until 7AM.

Do you know if it was open 24 hours back in July of 2008? I ask because (again it's not evidence but suspicious) I have to believe if she came downstairs with the 2 year old and found no milk and Brad was right behind her, she would have sent him right then. She would not have waited 2 hours with a crying child.

 

[kar]

I have shopped there regularly for years and as far as I can remember it has always been 24 hours. It definitely was in 2008.

 

[Cheyenne130]

I have shopped there regularly for years and as far as I can remember it has always been 24 hours. It definitely was in 2008.

Thank you. That makes his story seem that much more hinky.

 

[SleuthinNC]

I wonder if any of the Cisco test labs have external access through an SBC. My systems do, so I have my phones connected directly over the public internet without vpn connection. If not, can the spa3102 do vpn as well?

It does not do VPN. And I guess the easiest way to sum this up even if he could connect the Cisco IP Phone to the SPA3102 the call that would be generated by the IP Phone would be an IP call not a POTS call so it would not generate a phone call record in the TWC log.

 

[SleuthinNC]

Ok, I am not a techie but I have a general understanding of these scenarios presented (on a very elementary level - forwarding calls from his work CISCO phone to cell phone to look like the call came from home. Got it.).

1. To do all of this, how long would this take? Does BC just call his CISCO line and punch in some codes and it's done (i.e. 5 minutes) or does it take programming or something and could be an hour?

2. With any of the scenarios you all are discussing, if he did this, would there be some type of physical evidence (i.e. print outs of telephone records showing at 6:40 a.m. telephone A was accessed by BC, or someone with his access to the system, at 6:41 A forwarded a call to telephone B, and telephone C received the call)?

Sorry for the lack of technical verbiage, but if I can get it broken down like a first grader, I'm better off.

You've almost got it!

1. The phone that is forwarded is actually the home phone. To do this he picks up his home phone, dials *72 and enters his cell phone number. Cell phone rings, he answers cell, call forwarding is now active. All calls to home phone from this point will go to his cell phone until call forwarding is deactivated. This takes seconds and could have been done anytime prior to the morning calls.

To place the calls he initiates a call from his IP Phone, speculation at this point is he accessed hi IP Phone by dialing into the voicemail system and using his extension to call his home phone number which doesn't ring but instead rings his cell because forwarding is active.

2. Yes this would generate a trail of call records as you described

I hope this helps.